The New York Post was the original source of the reports Friday that Microsoft was pursuing a "proposed takeover" of Yahoo, as its story put it. Billions of dollars in Yahoo stock changed hands in the ensuing Wall Street frenzy.

However, by the end of the day, it appeared that the story was misguided, or at least out-of-date, unless you define "takeover" as "partnership." The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg News were among those reporting that Microsoft and Yahoo weren't considering a merger or acquisition, although they reportedly have in the past. The New York Times, citing a person briefed on the talks, reported that the discussions had been "going on for more than a year and had focused recently on a 'creative partnership,' not an acquisition."

Granted, we're dealing with anonymous sources here, so it's not easy to know what's real. I've also run across plenty of rumors and second-hand information about this, but I haven't been able to get any direct, on-the-record confirmation, one way or the other. Who knows, maybe Microsoft and Yahoo will surprise everyone with a big acquisition announcement this week. But until then, the overwhelming evidence suggests that a "takeover" isn't in the cards.

So how did the Post follow up? With a clarification? A mea culpa? An explanation of how everyone else was getting it wrong? Well, no.

Instead, its Saturday story introduced a significant hedge: "Sources said the talks with Microsoft are wide-ranging and include everything from an outright acquisition to the purchase of an equity stake to a joint venture setup."

To top things off, the Post's Saturday story was accompanied by a thumbnail image showing the story from Friday's edition, with the headline trumpeting Microsoft's "proposed takeover" of Yahoo. "CALLED IT," gloated the caption.

Um, what did they "call," exactly?